THE EVILS OF SPOILS SCHEMES INSIDIOUS.

89

American politics than all other causes combined. Its evils, which are reflected in the darkest pages of the world's history, are insidious. This fact has just been well illustrated, for what did the general public know, at the time, of the corruption described by Mr. Cox? Again, who but the principals and their accomplices would know of the corruption of New York's fugitive (1884) Aldermen, if the facts had not been published ? Further, spoils and insidious spoils schemes are not confined to public business. Many are private, or semiprivate; such, for example, as the numerous “rings” and monopolies throughout the country, the corruption of many of which has been exposed by newspapers during the past twenty five years.

But, as before said, this bad doctrine, which for full fifty years hung over the nation like the black clouds that precede as well as attend the coming storm, but no blacker than the picture of partisan patronage just portrayed, has probably had its day. And again, as before said, if it has, it is well, for fifty years more of such corruption would imperil the safety of the nation.* Fortunately a welcome, timely, and salutary change has come. The beclouded skies are slowly but surely clearing, and the outlook is hopeful. A great political storm is subsiding and is being succeeded by a political sunshine that not only makes the dangers through which we have passed plainer, but is teaching us how to avoid them in the future.

Our course is plain. The civil service law, in order to make it a complete success, must be enforced and perfected and its scope gradually increased. Its enforcement will naturally lead to its perfection, and its

* Doubts may well be entertained whether our government could survive the strain of a continuance of this system.-GROVER CLEVELAND,

90

SOMETHING BETTER THAN OFFICEHOLDING.

perfection to its increase of scope.

As before said, the

law has made a good beginning. It must also make a good ending. The increase of its usefulness must not cease till it has utterly destroyed the political dragon that has done so much to degrade American politics. Safety itself demands that, no matter what the circumstances may be, a repetition of the scenes described by Mr. Cox shall be rendered impossible. This, notwithstanding it requires the practical abolition of the patronage system, is not as difficult as it seems. When business men and business men only, without regard to politics, fill all non-political public offices, the patronage system will be practically dead, and the complete reform of the civil service will be a question of only a few years.

The civil service law promises to gradually accomplish this result. It will then have been carried to its legitimate conclusion. And it is well. There is something higher, better, and more important for Americans than ordinary officeholding.* The time and talent heretofore spent in striving for office can hereafter be more usefully devoted to studying the exact nature of public grievances and to originating corrective measures for them. This is noble, patriotic, and useful work, for it subserves the interests of the people as a body. Americans who are not already qualified, should qualify themselves for this work In short, they should imitate the statesmen whose wise words and examples are given in the succeeding as well as other chapters of this volume.

* * *

*The support which has been given to the present administration in its efforts to preserve and advance this reform should confirm our belief that there is a sentiment among the people better than a desire to hold office, and a patriotic impulse upon which may safely rest the integrity of our institutions and the strength and perpetuity of our government.-GROVER CLEVELAND.

CHAPTER VII.

LEADING STATESMEN'S PRINCIPLES.

The Merit System both Preached and Practiced by the six first Presidents (forty years).—Powerful blows at the Patronage System.— A profound disquisition on its Evils by William Paley of England (1785).—James Wilson on Patronage and Official Appointments.

PRESIDENT WASHINGTON's three cardinal rules were ("Writings," ix, 479): f. He would not be under engagements to any person. 2. He would not be influenced by "ties of family blood." 3. Three things were to be considered: (a) Fitness. (b) The "comparative merits and sufferings in service." (c) The equal distribution of appointments among the States.

It is noteworthy that the civil service law is practically the same as the three last requirements. It is therefore Washingtonian.

President John Adams went into office with the "determination to make as few removals as possible-not one from personal motives, not one from party consid erations" (ix, 47). But he would not countenance "misconduct in office," and he removed "several officers at Portsmouth" because their "daily language," reported to him, implied "aversion if not hostility to the government."

President Jefferson's principles are expressed in thirtythree words, thus (iv, 391): "Good men, in whom there is no objection but a difference of political principle, practiced only as far as the right of a private citizen

92

JEFFERSON, MADISON, MONROE, J. Q. ADAMS.

*

will justify, are not proper subjects of removal." Referring to removals from office, Jefferson says (iv, 409) : “I had foreseen, years ago, that the first Republican President * * would have a dreadful operation to perform." The Marshals removed by him were charged with packing juries. When urged by a representative of the Tammany Society of Baltimore to remove Federalists from office, the philosopher said (Parton's "Life of Jefferson," p. 611): “What is the difference between denying the right of suffrage and punishing a man for exercising it by turning him out of office?"

* *

* * *

* *

President Madison, writing to Edward Coles, August 29, 1834, said (iv, 356): “You call my attention, with much emphasis, to the principle that offices were the spoils of victory. * I fully agree in all the odium you attach to such a rule. *The principle could not fail to degrade any administration." President Monroe says (Gilman's "Monroe," p. 202): "No person at the head of the government has, in my opinion, any claim to the active partisan exertions of those in office under him."

President John Quincy Adams, not only refused to remove political opponents, but he even refused to remove a naval officer who had been concerned in an unexecuted project to insult one of his (Adams's) political friends. He says (Morse's "Adams," p. 180): "I have been urged to sweep away my opponents and provide for my friends. I can justify the refusal to adopt this policy only by the steadiness and consistency of my adherence to my own. If I depart from this in one instance, I shall be called upon to do the same in many. An invidious and inquisitorial scrutiny into the personal dispositions of public officers will creep through the whole Union, and the most selfish and sordid passions will be kindled into activity to distort the conduct and

TYLER, POLK, BUCHANAN, JOHNSON.

333

93

misrepresent the feelings of men whose places may become the prize of slander upon them."*

President Tyler was opposed to making removals on account of political opinions. In his first annual message he said he had used the power only in cases of unfaithfulness, incompetency, and partisanship that led to undue influence over elections. He further said (Benton's Debates, xiv, 375): "I shall cordially concur in any constitutional measures for regulating and restraining the power of removal."

President Polk says (James Schouler in Atlantic Monthly, Aug. '95. p. 237): "March 4, 1846: A year gone, and the pressure for office has not abated. Will this pressure never cease? I most sincerely wish that I had no offices to bestow. If I had not, it would add much to the happiness and comfort of my position. As it is, I have no office to bestow without turning out better men than a large majority of those who seek their places." In September following he speaks of this "constant stream of persons seeking office and begging money." "May, 1847: Almost the whole of my embarrassment in administering the government grows out of the public patronage. *** The herd of officeseekers are the most unprincipled persons in the country. *** Patronage is injurious to a President." *** James Buchanan, in discussing in the Senate, in 1839, a bill to prevent the interference of Federal officers with elections, said (Curtis's Buchanan," i, 395): "Now, sir, if any freak of destiny should ever place me in one of these executive departments * * * I shall tell you the course I would pursue. I should not become an inquisitor of the political opinions of the subordinate officeholders. * For the higher and more responsible offices, however, I would select able, faithful, and well tried political friends. With General Washington, I believe that any other course be a sort of political suicide.'"t

*

*

* * *

'would

President Johnson says (Appendix to Cong. Globe, 1867, p. 4): "The unrestricted power of removal from office is a very great one to be trusted even to a Magistrate chosen by the general suffrage of the whole people, and accountable directly to them for his acts. It is undoubtedly liable to abuse, and at some period of our history perhaps has been abused."

*Washington, says James Parton, made 9 removals, J. Adams 9, Jefferson 39, Madison 5, Monroe 9, J. Q. Adams 2-total, 73. J. C. Calhoun (ii, 438) says J. Adams made 10 removals and Jefferson 42. Jackson's removals, in eight years, aggregated nearly 1,000.

Writings, xi, 75. On page 78 he speaks of "governmental suicide."